DDR4 Haswell-E Scaling Review: 2133 to 3200 with G.Skill, Corsair, ADATA and Crucial
by Ian Cutress on February 5, 2015 10:10 AM ESTSingle GTX 770 Gaming
The normal avenue for faster memory lies in integrated graphics solutions, but as Haswell-E does not have integrated graphics we are testing typical gaming scenarios using relatively high end graphics cards. First up is a single MSI GTX 770 Lightning in our Haswell-E system, running our benchmarks at 1080p and maximum settings. We take the average frame rates and minimum frame rates for each of our tests.
Dirt 3: Average FPS
Dirt 3: Minimum FPS
Bioshock Infinite: Average FPS
Bioshock Infinite: Minimum FPS
Tomb Raider: Average FPS
Tomb Raider: Minimum FPS
Sleeping Dogs: Average FPS
Sleeping Dogs: Minimum FPS
Conclusions at 1080p/Max with a GTX 770
The only real deficit observed throughout our testing is the DDR4-2133 C15 4x4GB kit dropping down to 121 FPS in F1 2013 from a 126 FPS average from the other kits, resulting in a less-than 5% drop by choosing the default JEDEC kit in the 4x4 configuration. Moving up to the 4x8 and 8x8 produces 125 FPS, but anything above 2133 C15 gets around the top result from 125-127.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
120 Comments
View All Comments
Flunk - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
"There is one other group of individuals where super-high frequency memory on Haswell-E makes sense – the sub-zero overclockers."Yeah, I'm sure the 200 people on the planet who care about that are a real big market...
Nice article overall though. I don't know why, but I was expecting more from DDR4. It looks like there is little reason to upgrade right now. Although I expect we'll all end up being forced into it by Intel.
Antronman - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
There's a lot of consumers who want high clocked memory just because they want it.And there's more than 200 extreme overclockers on the planet.
galta - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
The reason to upgrade today is not DDR4 per se, but 5xxx CPUs, and you might want these CPUs because of the extra cores, extra pci lanes, both, or just because you want it and can pay for it.These discussions over RAM get me tired. Rocks on the streets know that:
a) fast memory makes close to no difference in real world, especially today with overclocking being so much more friendly than it was in the past
b) whenever a new standard is introduced, it performs poorly when compared to previous standard. It was like this with DDR3 back in 2008 and it's the same today, but today you probably have less than 200 people saying they miss DDR2.
Let's discuss more interesting and reasonable subjects.
Murloc - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
200? You're severely underestimating the number of people who do that.Also why do car companies make cars that are going to be driven by just a few sheiks?
With rams it's probably even easier given that you just have to bin chips and there are people who buy them just because they want the best. That's why they put increasingly cooler heatsinks and packages on the more pricey sticks. Not because they really need additional cooling in non-extreme use cases.
FlushedBubblyJock - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
Because the elite cater to the elite, and the clique' is small and expensive, and leeches off the masses for the advantage and opulent and greedy lifestyle and media hype and self aggrandizement.They can fly each other around the world for huge parties and giveaway gatherings called global contests and spend enormous sums and feel very important.
imaheadcase - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
Wait a tick, DDR2 is 800+mhz. That is what its default to on both my systems.imaheadcase - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
You put 200-533 MHz. My is actually at 936mhz for the overclock to.ZeDestructor - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
DDR = Double Data Rate, i.e: two operations are done per clock cycle. Thus the frequency is 400, but the effective frequency is 800. Same applies for DDR1-DDR4.GDDR5 is crazier: 4 operations per clock cycle, so 1750MHz works out to 7000MHz effective.
Murloc - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
so basically what we knew all along: many enthusiasts are just wasting their money. The same goes for size although few people who build PCs are that stupid when it comes to this, it's mostly gamers who buy pre-built PCs who fall into this trap (it's not like they have much of a choice anyway, everybody is selling computers with lots of RAM and a pricey CPU bottlenecked by a weak GPU because it makes them money).fredv78 - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
seems to me most benchmarks are within the error margin (which is usually up to 3% and ideally should be quoted)